Climate Health
Where in the world is climate change impacting health the most?
Human activity and climate change have had an indisputable impact on the environment, with increasing pollution, rising sea levels and average temperatures getting warmer with each passing year. As the climate continues to change, we wanted to investigate which countries are providing the most hospitable and healthy environments for humans to live in, and which parts of the world have climates which pose the greatest risk to human health.
By looking at a range of environmental factors, from unsafe drinking water and sanitation to exposure to a variety of dangerous elements and pollutants, we at MedicalAid.com have created an Environment Health Index of over 100 countries to reveal the most and least healthy places to live on the planet. Click and compare medical aid plans here.
Nordic countries lead the way with the healthiest environments
Iceland Healthy Environment Score: >> 7.82
Iceland has the healthiest environment for humans to live in based on the range of factors in our study, having received a Healthy Environment Score of 7.82. This cold island country sits between the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans in the far north of the Northern Hemisphere, and benefits from extremely clean air and low temperature increases, having warmed by only 1.2°C since the baseline period of 1951 to 1980.
Additionally, Iceland received a perfect score of 100 for both the cleanliness of its drinking water and its sanitation, while also recording very low levels of exposure to lead and volatile organic compounds. However, people living in Iceland are still exposed to considerable levels of ozone, and the country’s CO2 emissions are in the top quartile with 8.4 metric tons per capita.
Sweden Healthy Environment Score: >> 7.75
The country with the second healthiest environment is Sweden, which received an overall score of 7.75. Sweden is another cold northern country that provides its people with a relatively clean and livable environment. Like Iceland, the country has incredibly clean air, receiving a perfect score for low exposure to dangerous PM2.5 particulates that are present in heavily polluted air.
Sweden also scored very well for safe drinking water, sanitation, low exposure to lead, and low levels of CO2 emissions per capita, though compared to Iceland it was let down by a high temperature increase of 2.11°C and greater exposure to volatile organic compounds.
Finland Healthy Environment Score: >> 7.57
Finland has the third healthiest environment in our study with an overall score of 7.57, meaning Nordic countries inhabit all of the top three spots. With a similar subarctic climate to our top two countries, Finland performed well in many of the same areas, scoring a perfect 100 for low exposure to lead and PM2.5 pollutants in the air.
The country also received top marks for clean drinking water and sanitation and recorded lower levels of ozone exposure than either Sweden or Iceland. However, Finland was prevented from placing higher by a considerable temperature increase of 2.06°C, 7 metric tons of CO2 emissions per capita, and equal levels of exposure to volatile organic compounds as Sweden. The other Nordic countries of Norway and Denmark both performed relatively well, taking seventh and eleventh place respectively.
United Kingdom and Ireland Healthy Environment Score: >> 7.46
Tied for fourth place are the United Kingdom and Ireland, with both countries receiving a Healthy Environment Score of 7.46. While both received perfect scores for clean drinking water, the UK was the only one of the pair to score perfectly for safe sanitation, with Ireland just missing out with a respectable 93.5/100.
The United Kingdom also outperformed Ireland when it came to low levels of lead exposure and lower CO2 emissions per capita, while Ireland recorded a lower temperature increase of 1.76°C along with lower levels of exposure to ozone, airborne PM2.5 pollutants and organic volatile compounds.
The countries facing the biggest heath impacts due to climate change
Iran Healthy Environment Score: >> 2.16
The country in our study with the least healthy environment for humans to live in is Iran, which received a score of just 2.16. This large Middle Eastern country performed best for clean sanitation, with a score of 60.9/100, and received a clean drinking water rating of 48.8.
Iran scored particularly poorly for exposure to dangerous PM2.5 particles with a rating of 17.2/100, having very high levels of exposure to lead, ozone and volatile organic compounds. The country also recorded a high average temperature increase of 2.37°C and a very high 8.43 metric tons of CO2 emissions per capita.
Equatorial Guinea Healthy Environment Score: >> 2.32
The country with the second least healthy environment is Equatorial Guinea, which received an overall score of 2.32. Sitting on the West African coast between Cameroon and Gabon, Equatorial Guinea has not seen a huge increase in temperature in recent decades, with a rise of just 1.25°C. However, this does not mean it is a healthy place to live, as the country recorded the tenth-worst level of PM2.5 pollution in our study.
Equatorial Guinea scored poorly in most factors but was saved from taking the bottom spot by having lower levels of ozone and lead pollution than Iran, as well as producing approximately half the amount of CO2 emissions per capita.
Morocco Healthy Environment Score: >> 2.37
The North African country of Morocco has the third least healthy environment in our study, with an overall score of 2.37. Morocco has seen a considerable temperature increase of 2.30°C over the last few decades, but it has also recorded a relatively low level of CO2 emissions at just 1.97 metric tons per capita.
Among the remaining factors, Morocco performed best when it came to sanitation, with a score of 47.2/100, followed by a score of 36.7 for clean drinking water. The area in which Morocco performed the worst was PM2.5 exposure resulting from polluted air, with the seventh lowest score of just 3.5/100, though the country also scored particularly poorly for lead exposure.
Mongolia Healthy Environment Score: >> 2.44
Mongolia recorded the fourth lowest Healthy Environment Score of 2.44, held back by receiving the worst score for PM2.5 exposure in our study at 0.5/100. The Mongolian capital of Ulaanbaatar is known for its heavy pollution and thick smog, which has been attributed to the widespread burning of coal as a primary source of heat.
Mongolia also performed particularly poorly for high levels of exposure to lead with the sixth-worst rating of 32.6/100. Additionally, Mongolia recorded high levels of CO2 pollution with 7.69 metric tons per capita. The area the country performed best in was exposure to volatile organic compounds, with Mongolia’s score of 56.1/100 meaning levels were just lower than average.
Turkmenistan Healthy Environment Score: >> 2.50
The Central Asian country of Turkmenistan earned the fifth-lowest Healthy Environment Score of 2.50. Turkmenistan performed poorly across the board, but with particular emphasis on PM2.5 pollution, a temperature rise of 2.53°C, and CO2 emissions of 13.62 metric tons emitted per capita.
While Turkmenistan did not perform well for any of the remaining factors, none of these scores was drastically below the international average. The worst of these scores was for lead exposure at 42.9/100, while the best result was for ozone exposure at 48.4/100.
Major Economies Not Safe From Climate Health Impact
It is worth noting that many of the world’s largest economies did not perform well, showing that a well-developed modern economy does not always come hand in hand with a clean and livable environment.
For example, the economic powerhouse of China finished in 94th place, tied with Azerbaijan, while South Africa, one of the continent’s largest economies, took 96th place. Many wealthy nations in the Middle East such as Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE also placed in the bottom 20, suggesting that regional factors might also play a large role in creating unhealthy environments.
Other major world economies such as the United States, South Korea, Taiwan and Poland all showed considerable levels of pollution and exposure to dangerous materials, showing that the issue of pollution creating unhealthy environments is globally important.
Our full ranking of 103 countries can be found in the table above.
Methodology
We wanted to reveal the countries with the healthiest and least healthy environments for human habitation. To do this, we compared over 100 countries based on a series of health-related factors.
We used data from Yale University’s Environmental Performance Index to record the levels of exposure to lead, ozone, PM2.5 particles and volatile organic compounds in different countries, as well as levels of unsafe sanitation and drinking water.
This was combined with data from the European Commission’s Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research which revealed the per capita volume of CO2 emissions for each country.
The final factor included was data sourced from the IMF’s Climate Change Indicators Dashboard showing the change in average surface temperature in each country compared to baseline temperatures during 1951-1980.
A total of 103 countries were included in the final results. These included any countries within the OECD, G20, and European Union and countries listed as either advanced or emerging market economies by the IMF. Any country for which complete data was not available was removed, as were countries currently engaged in conflict.